At the press conference, Berri mentioned the land and sea border, while Israel and the United States mentioned only the maritime border. Analysts said one of the reasons previous efforts to start talks had failed was that the two sides disagreed on the issue of the limit to be discussed. In addition to the dispute over the maritime border, the two countries are fighting over a border wall that Israel is to build in 2018. A UN peacekeeping force has been monitoring the border since Israel`s military withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, ending a 22-year occupation. The U.S. State Department welcomed the agreement and said it took three years of diplomacy. The agreement between the two sides on a common framework for the maritime talks will allow the two countries to start talks that have the potential to strengthen the stability, security and prosperity of Lebanese and Israeli citizens. Today`s announcement is a decisive step forward that serves the interests of Lebanon and Israel, the region and the United States. Both countries have asked the United States to participate in maritime talks as mediators and mediators. The United States looks forward to the prompt start of maritime border talks in Naqoura, Lebanon, under the flag of unseal Mehrer and under the auspices of the Office of the United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon (UNSCOL). Although this conflict was extremely damaging (more than 100 civilians were killed by firing artillery at a UN site in Qana), it resulted in an agreement that had some perseverance.
Following the mediation of the United States and France, the two sides reached a formal and written agreement called the Lebanon-Israel ceasefire agreement. The agreement was relatively limited and prohibited Lebanese armed groups from firing rockets at Israel and Israel from targeting civilian structures in Lebanon. It has also set up a monitoring group with Members of the United States, France, Israel, Lebanon and Syria to detect ceasefire violations and report on incidents. In particular, it did not demand a halt to the fighting or the withdrawal of Israel from Lebanon. The limited nature of the agreement made it tasty for all parties, as well as the fact that it was not officially signed by any of the parties, even though it was a written agreement.